Author Topic: Dimonds (Read 13406 times)

OHCA · « **Reply #30 on:** December 01, 2014, 11:46:57 PM »

Quote from: Malleus

Quote from: Ladislaus
Let's have a more objective look at the Dimonds, since most people have an ax to grind.

1) I agree that they are not good debaters and do not construct solid arguments. In particular, they fail to see finer distinctions that would make certain points of theirs more complex than they pretend.

2) They often miss subtle nuance in some of the quotes they adduce to prove their positions.

3) As with the dogmatic sedevacantists, this lack of ability to consider complexities and to make distinctions leads to a dogmatism, a pretense that their position is essentially de fide because it derives from a simple obvious "irrefutable" syllogism. They use the word "irrefutable" all the time.

4) They do have a lot of talent and do much good. Their life of Padre Pio, their book on UFOs, their video on hell, and their How the Bible Proves the Teachings of the Catholic Church, their materials exposing evolution and modern science, et al. are absolutely wonderful.

5) They practically give their stuff away, likely at a loss (charging just pennies for books, videos, and pamphlets); they are not about making money.

6) In terms of their being brothers, the charge that they are "fake Benedictines" is absurd and uncharitable. They're every bit as REAL as 99% of all Traditional groups of religious that have been founded without the requisite jurisdiction.

7) Whether any of you like it or not, the Dimonds have correctly identified the root cause of the problem behind Vatican II ... a heretical new ecclesiology that resulted from a gradual rejection of EENS. How do you get rid of EENS? Just redefine "Church" and "outside", and you're good. You're also now right there at Vatican II.

8) Dimonds then realized that the weapon used by the heretics to undermine EENS and create the new ecclesiology was BoD. But, unable to make the appropriate distinctions, they went overboard in declaring BoD "heretical" ... not realizing that one could defend EENS without necessarily rejecting BoD (at least logically). In fact, the ardent proponents of BoD ALWAYS conflate the issues on purpose because then they can pretend that they have the authority of St. Thomas, St. Alphonsus, etc. behind their refusal to accept EENS and their new gnostic-Pelagian-Protestant ecclsiology.

9) Dimonds recognize the bad will in most BoD proponents. Most of them hold to their opinion because the find EENS unpalatable and won't listen to reason. Consequently, the Dimonds became more frustrated and angry and bitter over time and have been overcome with bitter zeal.

10) In excommunicating proponents of BoD, the Dimonds have adopted a schismatic stance. I have repeatedly called them out on this. Father Feeney and the vast majority of "Feeneyites" do NOT do this but consider their position on BoD to be personal opinion.

What's interesting is that most of the bad traits of the Dimonds are not shared by the Feeneyite population as a whole, most of whom actually tend to be R&R. In fact, there are relatively few sedevacantist Feeneyites, and the most hostile enemies of Father Feeney and EENS come from the ranks of the SVs.

So most of the flaws one sees in the Dimonds are shared with the sedeavacantists and their bitter zeal and all its bad fruits actually emanate from the dogmatic sedevacantism rather than from Feeneyism.

The Novus ordo says nothing of bod in order to advance indifferentism and their denial of eens.

They simply state non Catholics are part of the church whether they are bad willed or not, whether they desire baptism or not.

Yes--this was my experience in conciliardom. Even from "conservative" priests.

andysloan · « **Reply #31 on:** December 02, 2014, 01:11:07 AM »

Ladislaus said:

"They do have a lot of talent and do much good. Their life of Padre Pio, their book on UFOs, their video on hell, and their How the Bible Proves the Teachings of the Catholic Church, their materials exposing evolution and modern science, et al. are absolutely wonderful."

1 Corinthians 13:1-6

"If I speak with the tongues of men, and of angels, and have not charity, I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal. And if I should have prophecy and should know all mysteries, and all knowledge, and if I should have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, and have not charity, I am nothing. And if I should distribute all my goods to feed the poor, and if I should deliver my body to be burned, and have not charity, it profiteth me nothing. Charity is patient, is kind: charity envieth not, dealeth not perversely; is not puffed up; Is not ambitious, seeketh not her own, is not provoked to anger, thinketh no evil;
Rejoiceth not in iniquity, but rejoiceth with the truth;"

Matthew 23:15

"Woe to you scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites; because you go round about the sea and the land to make one proselyte; and when he is made, you make him the child of hell twofold more than yourselves."[/i]

Ladislaus further states:

"Whether any of you like it or not, the Dimonds have correctly identified the root cause of the problem behind Vatican II ... a heretical new ecclesiology that resulted from a gradual rejection of EENS. "

The root cause is the loss of belief in the True Presence. In this belief is all Catholicism.

Ephesians 5:30

"Because we are members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones."

Apocalypse 2:17

"To him that overcometh, I will give the hidden manna,"

John 6:54 & 67

"Then Jesus said to them: Amen, amen I say unto you: Except you eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, you shall not have life in you.
After this many of his disciples went back; and walked no more with him."

1 Corinthians 11:28-29

"But let a man prove himself: and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of the chalice. For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh judgment to himself, not discerning the body of the Lord."

Ladislaus · « **Reply #32 on:** December 02, 2014, 06:29:12 AM »

Quote from: Malleus

The Novus ordo says nothing of bod in order to advance indifferentism and their denial of eens.

They simply state non Catholics are part of the church whether they are bad willed or not, whether they desire baptism or not.

That's a very broad brush and is therefore not entirely accurate. Yes, your flaming liberal "I don't care what the Church teaches" heretic Novus Ordites just deny EENS outright. Those who accept EENS in principle, the more "conservative" ones, invariably leverage the concept of BoD in the interests of the new ecclesiology. Karl Rahner himself traced the progression through BoD to Vatican II.

Traditional Catholics who try to find exceptions to EENS also use BoD as the weapon. Of course they apply BoD quite loosely, even to Protestants who are Baptized, so that BoD is really nothing but code-word for "sincerity" or "good will". So the Church of the Faithful from Church dogmatic formulae has become the Church of the Sincere. BoD as used by most modern proponents (not, however, by the likes of St. Thomas and St. Alphonsus) is nothing more than Pelagianism in disguise.

Binechi · « **Reply #33 on:** December 02, 2014, 06:41:45 AM »

Quote

For all of you who say the Dimonds are not good debaters.... for God's sake, call them up, set up a recorded debate and hand them their lunch.

What a great Idea.... The truth of the matter is there is no one here who would take the open and public challenge, as they would come away "red faced " and empty handed.
Peter Dimond in is his great book , "Outside the Catholic Church There is Absolutely No Salvation", is a comprehensive Manual detailing , all dealing with Baptism of Desire/Blood and Salvation , Backed always with Popes , Councils and Church Docuмents, which none here can do, and is why you won t take the Challenge. None can stand the Truth.

All the arm chair theologians out there ,, here is you chance,, let s see what your made of.

andysloan
Ladislaus
Cantarella
All the followers of Fr. Fention
Emerentina
SBC followers

Their Email.... mhfm1@aol.com

andysloan · « **Reply #34 on:** December 02, 2014, 07:43:32 AM »

To Director:

I have already had an email debate with him regarding the falsity of sedevacantism (Dogma 6:6; Vatican 1; Matthew 18:15-17). Here is an excerpt of one reply.

"Without in any way discounting the seriousness of the matter or the evil entailed in the position, it’s true that the position which recognizes Francis as the pope is theologically laughable. For anyone who understands and believes anything about Church unity, the Papacy, papal infallibility, the Magisterium, Church teaching on heresy, etc., your position is a JOKE. That’s why more and more people who are even slightly conservative are figuring out that he’s not the pope. You could laugh right in the face of someone who thinks, as you do, that Antipope Francis or Antipope Benedict XVI or Antipope John Paul II were popes. It’s almost not even worth debating at this point because it’s so obvious to anyone with even a small amount of good will. In addition to the fact that the Vatican II antipopes were and are clear heretics, they officially taught the opposite of true popes. That's impossible for popes to do. Every day Antipope Francis and your non-Catholic sect give more absolute proof for what we’ve been saying for years.

To say that Francis is the pope is like saying that the Dalai Lama is the pope.

The evidence that John Paul II was the Antichrist is overwhelming, but obviously an idolater like you won't realize it. You don’t even believe in Jesus Christ or Catholic teaching. Thus, deeper wisdom is folly to you. You probably also reject Sr. Lucia’s statement that we are in the end times. You haven't even figured out that John Paul II taught that every man is God and worshipped false gods at Assisi (facts). You would probably even deny that John Paul II facilitated idolatry at Assisi. You are a simply a possessed fool. When you go to bed tonight, know that we know for certain that Francis is not the pope and that you are on the road to Hell.

MHFM

www.SchismError.com

P.S. Don't expect more responses from us, even if you respond."

Thus, we see the common behaviour of schismatics - in mortal sin and therefore deprived of charity by God, they are enslaved to abuse and slander when contradicted.

3 John 1:9-10

"I had written perhaps to the church: but Diotrephes, who loveth to have the pre-eminence among them, doth not receive us. For this cause, if I come, I will advertise his works which he doth, with malicious words prating against us. And as if these things were not enough for him, neither doth he himself receive the brethren, and them that do receive them he forbiddeth, and casteth out of the church."

Peter Dimond is simply a doctrinal bully, in pursuit of his own glory.

Romans 16:17-18

"Now I beseech you, brethren, to mark them who make dissensions and offences contrary to the doctrine which you have learned, and avoid them. For they that are such, serve not Christ our Lord, but their own belly; and by pleasing speeches and good words, seduce the hearts of the innocent."

James 3:14-16

"But if you have bitter zeal, and there be contentions in your hearts; glory not, and be not liars against the truth. For this is not wisdom, descending from above: but earthly, sensual, devilish.
For where envying and contention is, there is inconstancy, and every evil work."

"A heretic is one who either devises or follows false and new opinions, for the sake of some temporal profit, especially that he may lord and be honored above others." St Augustine

God will deal with him in time:

2 Peter 2:1

But there were also false prophets among the people, even as there shall be among you lying teachers, who shall bring in sects of perdition,

Job 20:6-7

"If his pride mount up even to heaven, and his head touch the clouds: In the end he shall be destroyed like a dunghill, and they that has seen him shall say: Where is he?"

Matthew 23:24

"Blind guides, who strain out a gnat, and swallow a camel."

Malleus · « **Reply #35 on:** December 02, 2014, 08:51:47 AM »

Quote from: andysloan

When you go to bed tonight, know that we know for certain that Francis is not the pope and that you are on the road to Hell.

MHFM

They always need to proclaim that x person is on the road to Hell, when they are as well. How ironic.

In another debate Bob Dimond had he said "I can tell you INFALLIBLY that you're on the road to Hell."

Sheesh!

andysloan · « **Reply #36 on:** December 02, 2014, 09:13:42 AM »

It is unthinkable that someone who could proclaim themselves truly Catholic, could speak the way they do. If you look on their website, where is talk of the cross, penance, love of God and neighbour, holy devotions? It is cold and obsessive.

I hope anyone who adheres to or respects them will wake up and run a mile, as MHFM is a citadel of the devil to draw people into error (like the CMRI).

In truth, I pray for Peter Dimond, because what an operation of deceit they are running and what an account will have to be given for the slander, abuse and promulgation of false doctrine.

2 Timothy 3:13

"But evil men and seducers shall grow worse and worse: erring, and driving into error."

Ladislaus · « **Reply #37 on:** December 02, 2014, 10:04:29 AM »

Quote from: Nado

the accusation that you are a bad-will heretic....just like Ladislaus here pulled on me recently.

Most often they are correct when they make this accusation ... except that they go the extra step and pretend to judge the state of one's soul, the degree of culpability in the internal forum, and condemn people to hell ... with apparent relish.

You can in fact judge bad will in the external forum, just as you are clearly judging them to be of bad will, eh, Nado? Pot calling the kettle black?

I put neither your nor them in hell. I can, however, ascertain from your actions and words, Nado, that your theological positions stem from ulterior motives of the will rather than from cogent reasons, based on the self-contradictions and many signs of your begging the question. Similarly, I can judge that the Dimonds are motivated by bad will and bitter zeal. As to the degree of culpability, I leave that entirely in the Hands of God where it belongs. If I were a priest, I would not refuse you Communion, for instance, despite the fact that I have determined you to be a bad-willed heretic. Why? Because there are obviously degrees of bad will, and the degree of bad will required to put one outside the Church is quite high; you would have to at least implicitly repudiate the formal motive of faith, the Magisterium. In the current vacuum of authority, there's sufficient confusion about various theological issues to absolve people from that highest degree of guilt. Now, if you made it clear that you KNEW what the Church taught on a matter and then rejected it anyway, then that's different and the formal heresy becomes quite manifest. But if you make various subtle arguments defending your position to be in conformity with Church teaching, then however wrong and absurd and heretical the position is, it's difficult to ascertain anything more than material error. That is the key that most sedevacantists don't see and refuse to see. I am confident that if a new Traditional Pope Pius XIII came along and he solemnly condemned your position, that you would retract it. And that in the end is the litmus test for whether someone is a Catholic, that disposition to accept the teaching of the Magisterium as their formal rule of faith over their private judgment. I am confident that 99% of those who call themselves Traditional Catholics pass that test.

As a sedevacantist, you too are accusing Francis of bad-willed heresy ... but go the extra step to take it upon yourself to declare him outside the Church. So stop with the hypocrisy and sanctimonious self-pity already.

There's nothing so insipid as the modern greatest commandment of all, "Thou shalt not judge." We can in fact judge and do judge every day. We judge people's attitudes and dispositions based on external indicators. Where it stops is in judging the degree of culpability before God Himself. We cannot know this.

You've made it clear that you are a bad-willed Pelagian heretic, Nado. But, if I were like you, then I would consider you outside the Church. But, unlike yourself, I know the limits of my judgment. I have a duty to combat heresy whenever I am confronted with it, whether you like it or not, and whether it makes you uncomfortable or not. As for your own personal conscience, that's between you an God.

Malleus · « **Reply #38 on:** December 02, 2014, 10:48:25 AM »

Quote from: Ladislaus

As a sedevacantist, you too are accusing Francis of bad-willed heresy ... but go the extra step to take it upon yourself to declare him outside the Church. So stop with the hypocrisy and sanctimonious self-pity already.

You make it seem as if proving that he has cast himself outside the Church were something difficult.

Even non-Catholics now are asking the question if he's a heretic.

Quote from: Ladislaus

I have a duty to combat heresy whenever I am confronted with it

Except when it comes to Bergoglio or the other antipopes; then nothing is heresy and it is impossible to prove anyways.

Ladislaus · « **Reply #39 on:** December 02, 2014, 11:11:22 AM »

Quote from: Nado

In other words, Ladislaus pulled the accusation on me because he couldn't argue anything any more. A common Feeneyite ploy.

:roll-laugh1:

What, me being unable to "argue anything more"? People have said lots of things about me on CI but never that I was unable to argue anything more.

No, Nado, you were soundly refuted by about half a dozen posters, including two who are NOT "Feeneyite", but refused to admit that you are wrong.

Nishant, a non-Feeneyite, and one of the most charitable posters on CI, basically said the same thing:

Quote from: Nishant

Expecting Nado to correct her opinion, based on the numerous pre-Vatican II authorities that have already been shown to her, seems at this point to be optimistic to the point of foolishness, Ladislaus, but anyway, for anyone of good will seeking the truth on this question I put it out there.

Typical Cushingite ploy is to tar anyone a "Feeneyite" who refuses to become a Pelagian heretic.

Ladislaus · « **Reply #40 on:** December 02, 2014, 11:13:43 AM »

Quote from: Malleus

Except when it comes to Bergoglio or the other antipopes; then nothing is heresy and it is impossible to prove anyways.

False. I have repeatedly stated that I consider Bergoglio to be a Pelagian heretic. But, then again, the vast majority of the SVs here on CI are also Pelagian heretics. Thus you see the complexity of this issue? If I consider you Pelagian SVs to be Catholic, then I must also consider Francis to be a Catholic. Interesting dilemma, no?

But if I were to act like you SVs, I would just say that you are manifest heretics and not Catholics, and that would make it so.

Really one of the dumbest things Francis ever said was that Traditional Catholics are Pelagian heretics, with him being THE Pelagian heresiarch. Or did he actually have a point? Ah, never mind; he just has no idea what Pelagianism is.

Malleus · « **Reply #41 on:** December 02, 2014, 11:42:38 AM »

Quote from: Ladislaus

Quote from: Malleus
Except when it comes to Bergoglio or the other antipopes; then nothing is heresy and it is impossible to prove anyways.

False. I have repeatedly stated that I consider Bergoglio to be a Pelagian heretic. But, then again, the vast majority of the SVs here on CI are also Pelagian heretics. Thus you see the complexity of this issue? If I consider you Pelagian SVs to be Catholic, then I must also consider Francis to be a Catholic. Interesting dilemma, no?

But if I were to act like you SVs, I would just say that you are manifest heretics and not Catholics, and that would make it so.

Really one of the dumbest things Francis ever said was that Traditional Catholics are Pelagian heretics, with him being THE Pelagian heresiarch. Or did he actually have a point? Ah, never mind; he just has no idea what Pelagianism is.

Explain what you mean by SVs being Pelagian heretics.

APS · « **Reply #42 on:** December 02, 2014, 11:43:37 AM »

Quote from: Director

Quote
For all of you who say the Dimonds are not good debaters.... for God's sake, call them up, set up a recorded debate and hand them their lunch.

What a great Idea.... The truth of the matter is there is no one here who would take the open and public challenge, as they would come away "red faced " and empty handed.
Peter Dimond in is his great book , "Outside the Catholic Church There is Absolutely No Salvation", is a comprehensive Manual detailing , all dealing with Baptism of Desire/Blood and Salvation , Backed always with Popes , Councils and Church Docuмents, which none here can do, and is why you won t take the Challenge. None can stand the Truth.

All the arm chair theologians out there ,, here is you chance,, let s see what your made of.

andysloan
Ladislaus
Cantarella
All the followers of Fr. Fention
Emerentina
SBC followers

Their Email.... mhfm1@aol.com

APS · « **Reply #43 on:** December 02, 2014, 12:17:33 PM »

Quote from: APS

Quote from: Director
Quote
For all of you who say the Dimonds are not good debaters.... for God's sake, call them up, set up a recorded debate and hand them their lunch.

What a great Idea.... The truth of the matter is there is no one here who would take the open and public challenge, as they would come away "red faced " and empty handed.
Peter Dimond in is his great book , "Outside the Catholic Church There is Absolutely No Salvation", is a comprehensive Manual detailing , all dealing with Baptism of Desire/Blood and Salvation , Backed always with Popes , Councils and Church Docuмents, which none here can do, and is why you won t take the Challenge. None can stand the Truth.

All the arm chair theologians out there ,, here is you chance,, let s see what your made of.

andysloan
Ladislaus
Cantarella
All the followers of Fr. Fention
Emerentina
SBC followers

Their Email.... mhfm1@aol.com

Director you missed the point. I did debate them. I could not believe that the Dimonds had the Chutzpah to condemn someone as intelligent as Van Noort because he did not fit into their adolescent theology. I know that no manual theologian would deny BOD despite these men all having read and thoroughly understood the Council of Trent, Council of Florence and all the dogmatic decrees the Dimonds twist into their beliefs.

Dimonds have all day to read and make videos and do whatever they feel is their business. The problem is that if their interpretation of BOB is so clear why has no one ever said Baptism of Desire is heresy? And if so perhaps they should go back to their original line of work. http://mikediamondservices.com/plumbing-heating-air-conditioning-services/plumbing/?_vsrefdom=p.2859.c.48413&gclid=CjwKEAiA4_WjBRCNgf7A_KeE9jwSJADtegYdFMAhPjy7LZro1vkZZmB2Rqsd6LuNNBKwVXlkz1A38xoCn2rw_wcB

Malleus · « **Reply #44 on:** December 02, 2014, 04:13:40 PM »

Feeneyism will not disappear until something supernatural happens. There is no authority at the moment to condemn the likes of the Dimonds, so this nonsense will go on until some authoritative proclamation comes.